It is possible that US is speaking with split tongue. Ukrainians need US satellite-based surveillance for targetting. My view is that US is trying to maintain plausible deniability for formal reasons. Just as with Ukrainian attacks on Iranian ship in the Caspian sea. Or the attack on North-Stream in 2022.
I suspect this will be another non-event because I don't see the US neocons allowing Trump to "punish" Zelensky. If Zelensky loses his Z, the Azov guys coming after him would be even more difficult for the US to harness. At a time when Russia switches to tougher tactics and higher pressure, the Azov guys at the top merely increase Russia's determination to punch harder.
Azov guys are currently only doing what US tells them to do. For example, back in 2014 Kolomoisky was very influential in setting up the Azov group. Was he doing it on his own? Of course not, there was guidance from the Obama admin.
Likely so. But when the US influence starts to drop, it is more difficult for the US to harness them. For these people, being able to dance in discos in Kiev at night is probably critical, and the US needs to give them AD weapons to buy their loyalty.
In case of Ukraine, the support for this policy is actually stronger from the EU than in the US. So while the US has its finger on the trigger, it is the EU that is paying a bigger part. So correctly, one would have to say, only when the US, Canada, EU, other affiliates and SK+Japan influence starts to drop, it will become more difficult...
At the moment, it's the whole Western Block against Russia, with some pro-Russia support from Iran, North Korea, India and China.
Of course the West could become more efficient if it wanted. By rolling over and embracing national conservatism. But it would mean that the larger part of what Curtis Yarvin calls the "Cathedral" would need to change dramatically.
If the EU is paying a larger portion than the US (at least in the minds of the Azov guys), wouldn't that imply the EU countries have more influence on the Azov guys, hence more actions along the hawkish line of the EU chihuahuas than the slightly more moderate, controlled escalation strategy preferred by the US?
No. If the United States wanted to bring europe to heel, Trump need only tell the europeans, loudly and publicly, that if they persist in provoking Russia, the United States will not ride to their rescue.
My bet would be on the cynical option. And the WSJ is hardly worth the time to read. More often than not, the truth is 100% opposite the headline. Finally, Trump's act is purely theatrical. Best not to take it seriously.
Iraq’s National Security Adviser Qasim al-Aboudi has publicly accused Ukraine of conducting covert operations on Iraqi territory, alleging that security forces have arrested several individuals who confessed to carrying out attacks on behalf of Ukrainian intelligence.
This represents one of the most significant cases of Ukrainian intelligence operations extending beyond the European theatre and into the Middle East, following prior operations that similarly targeted Western adversaries in Syria, Sudan and West Africa.
Ukrainian intelligence personnel were alleged by Iraqi authorities to have sought to conduct attacks and subsequently attribute them to Iraqi “resistance groups,” a term commonly used to describe the network of predominantly militias supported by Iran.
"If it’s truly against Ukraine impeding Kazakhstan’s partially US-owned oil exports, then more than a tongue lashing would have to follow since Ukraine will keep defying the US unless it faces consequences, which could hypothetically entail a reduction of arms sales to NATO for passing along to Ukraine. If nothing serious follows, then it would suggest that the Trump Administration cynically prefers advancing the strategic goals connected with these strikes than defending the investments of a top US oil company."
You are getting warmer.
"Don't throw me in the briar patch! Not the briar patch!"
It is possible that US is speaking with split tongue. Ukrainians need US satellite-based surveillance for targetting. My view is that US is trying to maintain plausible deniability for formal reasons. Just as with Ukrainian attacks on Iranian ship in the Caspian sea. Or the attack on North-Stream in 2022.
I suspect this will be another non-event because I don't see the US neocons allowing Trump to "punish" Zelensky. If Zelensky loses his Z, the Azov guys coming after him would be even more difficult for the US to harness. At a time when Russia switches to tougher tactics and higher pressure, the Azov guys at the top merely increase Russia's determination to punch harder.
Azov guys are currently only doing what US tells them to do. For example, back in 2014 Kolomoisky was very influential in setting up the Azov group. Was he doing it on his own? Of course not, there was guidance from the Obama admin.
Likely so. But when the US influence starts to drop, it is more difficult for the US to harness them. For these people, being able to dance in discos in Kiev at night is probably critical, and the US needs to give them AD weapons to buy their loyalty.
In case of Ukraine, the support for this policy is actually stronger from the EU than in the US. So while the US has its finger on the trigger, it is the EU that is paying a bigger part. So correctly, one would have to say, only when the US, Canada, EU, other affiliates and SK+Japan influence starts to drop, it will become more difficult...
At the moment, it's the whole Western Block against Russia, with some pro-Russia support from Iran, North Korea, India and China.
Of course the West could become more efficient if it wanted. By rolling over and embracing national conservatism. But it would mean that the larger part of what Curtis Yarvin calls the "Cathedral" would need to change dramatically.
The europeans are like the little yappy dog that is trying to get Master to kill the postman while they bark joyously from the sidelines.
If the EU is paying a larger portion than the US (at least in the minds of the Azov guys), wouldn't that imply the EU countries have more influence on the Azov guys, hence more actions along the hawkish line of the EU chihuahuas than the slightly more moderate, controlled escalation strategy preferred by the US?
No. If the United States wanted to bring europe to heel, Trump need only tell the europeans, loudly and publicly, that if they persist in provoking Russia, the United States will not ride to their rescue.
Watch european tails tuck between european legs.
Yes. But will Trump do that?
Parts of the US government - its deep state, as well as the overall US cathedral - are EU-occupied.
I would agree that some of the neocons indeed behave that way.
Couls you stop saying such craps?
My bet would be on the cynical option. And the WSJ is hardly worth the time to read. More often than not, the truth is 100% opposite the headline. Finally, Trump's act is purely theatrical. Best not to take it seriously.
Iraq’s National Security Adviser Qasim al-Aboudi has publicly accused Ukraine of conducting covert operations on Iraqi territory, alleging that security forces have arrested several individuals who confessed to carrying out attacks on behalf of Ukrainian intelligence.
This represents one of the most significant cases of Ukrainian intelligence operations extending beyond the European theatre and into the Middle East, following prior operations that similarly targeted Western adversaries in Syria, Sudan and West Africa.
Ukrainian intelligence personnel were alleged by Iraqi authorities to have sought to conduct attacks and subsequently attribute them to Iraqi “resistance groups,” a term commonly used to describe the network of predominantly militias supported by Iran.
https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/ukrainian-saboteurs-targeted-iraqi-government-falseflag
if they were to attack non Russian vessels the world be doing the USA a favor. Ukraine & USA are against Russia.
Ukrainians want to display an anti- russian attuure in spite of the fact the Russian & Ukrainian pwople are IDEBTICAL.
"If it’s truly against Ukraine impeding Kazakhstan’s partially US-owned oil exports, then more than a tongue lashing would have to follow since Ukraine will keep defying the US unless it faces consequences, which could hypothetically entail a reduction of arms sales to NATO for passing along to Ukraine. If nothing serious follows, then it would suggest that the Trump Administration cynically prefers advancing the strategic goals connected with these strikes than defending the investments of a top US oil company."
You are getting warmer.
"Don't throw me in the briar patch! Not the briar patch!"